Hong Kong’s Thunder Power Claims To Have Technological Edge Over Tesla

Thunder Power which unveiled its concept electric car almost two years ago at the Frankfurt Motor Show (photos and videos here), says it has an edge over competitors – including Tesla (a frequent comparison in press releases that always makes us cringe).

Thunder Power EV

The Thunder Power EV with its 125 kWh battery and 400 miles of range was originally planned for introduction in 2017 (Europe) and 2018 (China), followed by U.S.

Apparently, that ‘edge over Tesla’ isn’t speed to market…moving on.

As of today, the Hong Kong-based company has filled more than 350 patent applications in the U.S. and China (maybe that is the edge?).

70 have been granted, including one of the apparently most important – a modular chassis system – “that allows flexibility in the design of future car models, making development and assembly faster and more cost-efficient“. Hrm, sounds familiar.

Thunder Power’s goal is to build most desirable EV in China, but like most OEMs with China-dreams, they can’t refrain from referencing Tesla. WardsAuto explains:

““An obvious difference between us and (U.S. EV maker) Tesla is we have the key technologies before actually investing in manufacturing,” Wellen Sham, Thunder Power CEO, tells WardsAuto at a launch event in Shanghai.”

““We are the world’s first company that got this modular-chassis patent,”.”

Another in-house developed technologies is thermal-management system for the battery.

Thunder Power EV From Above

The next step for Thunder Power is to build a test fleet of 20 pre-production cars, that will be tested over a period of one year in broad temperature conditions.

“Climatex testing is vital for the Chinese market, where winter temperatures drop as low as -22˚ F (-30˚ C) in the country’s northern reaches. Thunder Power also plans to sell cars in the Middle East, anticipating the region increasingly will welcome EVs that can tap into a fast-growing number of solar-powered charging stations.”

At The Controls Of The Thunder Power EV

We will see the production version, designed by a team in Italy, at the Frankfurt Motor Show in just a few days.

Production is now expected to begin in the third quarter of 2018 and the car to start at RMB500,000 ($73,300) prior subsidies.

While the production facility itself is to be operated in Ganzhou, in the Jiangxi province of China, though a joint venture with the local government of Ganzhou. Facility to cost RMB7.5 billion ($1.1 billion).

“But the current focus, Sham says, is to supply the Chinese market, including Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macao, from a plant in Ganzhou in Jiangxi province. A joint venture between Thunder Power and the local government of Ganzhou, the facility’s construction and commissioning is funded with RMB7.5 billion ($1.1 billion) from a local investment fund backed by China’s national development and reform commission.

Thunder Power’s own investment has been in securing its 10 core patents valued at RMB1.3 ($187 million). Thunder Power also will be in charge of the daily management of the facility.”

Thunder Power EV spec:

650 km (over 400 miles) of range

125 kWh battery

320 kW of system power (230 kW in base version)

0-62 mph (100 km/h) in less than 5 seconds

replenishment of around half of the battery capacity to take a half-hour

LOL, my assertion is based on the physics that control the way sound travels…the energy for the thunder sound comes from lightning bolt but the thunder sound has energy to make air molecules vibrate and travel into our ears and up the auditory nerve into the brain. Don’t believe me ask Albert…lol

Ha ha, I see your point. But I am also wary of all those tesla killers, Apple giving tesla a run for their money, etc. but it’s probably natural to compare yourself to the market leader and try to reach or exceed what they can do. Looking forward to a real product, like BYD which actually has their e6 model as cabs in the streets, however quality of BYD is said to be subpar when I talked to some locals in ShenZhen, ‘not a tesla’ was also the comparison that came up.

I have not seen a BYD e6, but I found a review of the build quality a few years ago to be shocking. In many ways, China is still a third-world country!

If BYD wants to sell cars in first-world countries, they are gonna have to up their game quite a bit. But then, I’ve been told they already have improved that quite a bit in the years since that e6 review.

I’ll certainly agree that the definition you’re using for “second world country” vs. “third world country” is archaic. I’m using the terms “first world country” and “third world country” in their modern meanings, with the latter meaning the opposite of “developed nation”.

And as for some being offended by the term “third world country”, well, some people are going to be offended no matter what anyone says. I’m not a big fan of political correctness; I am a big fan of accuracy in language usage.

If you’re really interested in the evolving meanings of these terms, there is some discussion here:

BYD’s EV is an OK product, that would be very OK. . . IF they were able to get rid of parts with poor material quality. Sub par plastic quality and sub par rubber quality – to begin with. Then they could follow up on corrotion improvements on nuts/bolts and the car in general. Then they should focus on electronics, with cable quality. I don’t demand silicone, but the PVC or whatever they use as wire insulation need to be better. I think it will only be 5-7 years before the quality is OK, and more or less equal to most western brands. They learn very quickly, and invest a lot in fabrication equipment. It is only natural that EV manufacturers compare their product to a Tesla, if (and only if) they have a product in the same category/size/prize range. Due to the range, there are (was) nobody else to compete with. If Tesla continue to deliver leading EV specs, for all their models – they will be the bechmark to compare competing products to. Even though Tesla have much room for improvements, they have the fundamentals right.. and some thing more then right 🙂 I hope the model Y,… Read more »

“…we have the key technologies before actually investing in manufacturing…”

Well, I admire his bold, if desperate, attempt to put a positive spin on his company not having invested anything in manufacturing. That’s certainly a very real difference between them and Tesla Inc. 😉

It’s laughably bad but doesn’t need to be good. The Chinese govt is pouring billions and billions. The only 2 quotes you need to read from the articles are:
…” though a joint venture with the local government of Ganzhou.”

“…. is funded with RMB7.5 billion ($1.1 billion) from a local investment fund backed by China’s national development and reform commission.”

I wish the US would bring back that technology loan program in a big way. Yes some of those companies are going to go broke. That’s part of the point…they are too risky in many cases for private investment. But it beats buying weapons or foreign oil. Perhaps we could slice off 5% of the defense budget for it.

It was inevitable that makers would assume the “winner” of the EV “race” is the one with higher range numbers. It isn’t true. A 400 mile range car gets you from California to Nevada, but does not make a good cross country car.

Further, all of the extra added weight for the battery being dragged around each day, when you are NOT using the 400 mile range actually makes the car less efficient.

If Tesla squeezes another 20kWh into the S pack, its 400 mile range goes a long way towards answering a big complaint about electrics: lots of “off route” range. In going cross country, there is usually not enough range to go off the interstate to see national parks, for example.

“…all of the extra added weight for the battery being dragged around each day, when you are NOT using the 400 mile range actually makes the car less efficient.”

Tch tch, Scott, you should know better than this by now. This issue has been heavily discussed.

A large battery isn’t merely “extra weight”. It pays off every time you charge the car, because that big battery doesn’t need to be charged as often or charged/discharged as deeply, which means it will last a lot longer than a smaller one. A large battery pack also is capable of being charged faster (in terms of miles added per minute) at a DCFC station.

And in addition to that large battery pack giving the car the ability to go out for a second trip the same day without needing to be recharged first, it also gives the car a better resale value.

Furthermore, a few hundred extra pounds doesn’t have that much impact on energy efficiency. You’d lose as much carrying a couple of passengers.

I presume you’re just being deliberately argumentative. Yes, of course lighter batteries make the vehicle more energy efficient. It’s just that larger capacity batteries are heavier, all else being equal.

That’s the first time I have heard it “proven” that extra weight does not affect vehicle power efficiency. I suggest you call Tesla and tell them their efforts to reduce vehicle weight with advanced materials is a waste of time!

I am somewhat amused by all the efforts EV makers go to make their vehicles lighter; all that effort to, in most cases, rather little effect. Kudos to BMW for using a mostly carbon fiber composite body, and that did help the BMW i3’s energy efficiency. But aside from the i3, most of the efforts to reduce weight amount to not more than the difference between carrying two passengers in the car, or not.

In general, improving aero by reducing drag is a far more effective way to improve energy efficiency in a car. Note that Tesla isn’t using that much aluminum in the Model 3, as opposed to the nearly all-aluminum Model S body.